Coherence Therapy
Clinical
Note
Note #7
(v1.0.1)
Topic: Guidelines for Creating
Juxtaposition Experiences
Author: Bruce Ecker, LMFT
This Clinical Note provides a map for guiding practitioners of Coherence Therapy in carrying out its final
phase—the transformation phase. In this phase, the client’s symptom-generating emotional learning or
schema is profoundly unlearned and dissolved by juxtaposition experiences that carry out the memory
reconsolidation process.
Some degree of familiarity with the overall methodology and concepts of Coherence Therapy is assumed in
what follows, including how Coherence Therapy fulfills the core process of transformational change, the
Therapeutic Reconsolidation Process. (For an introductory overview of Coherence Therapy and its
utilization of memory reconsolidation, see Clinical Note 6.)
The transformation phase of Coherence Therapy begins with a search for a fully real-feeling personal
knowledge that the client experiences as being a sharp contradiction of his or her symptom-requiring
schema, which is the target of change. When that contrary knowing is found, the next step is guiding the
client to experience both the target schema and the contrary knowing concurrently, side by side, in the
same field of awareness. This is the juxtaposition experience that Coherence Therapy defines as the critical
requirement for transformational change to take place.
The client’s first experience of the juxtaposition is the mismatch or prediction error experience that extensive research has shown to immediately unlock the neural encoding of the target learning. The target
learning is now available for fundamental unlearning and nullification. Just a few repetitions of the juxtaposition experience can then bring about that unlearning and nullification. This is the memory
reconsolidation process in action.
Subsequently, the markers of transformational change appear and are verified: the schema is devoid of its
former compelling emotional realness, it no longer triggers in response to its former cues, and it no longer
generates the symptoms it had been driving, with no effort required to maintain this liberating shift.
The chart on the next page (reproduced from Clinical Note 6) shows the correspondence of the steps in
Coherence Therapy and the Therapeutic Reconsolidation Process (TRP).
Following the chart are the main guidelines for carrying out the steps of Coherence Therapy’s transformation phase: finding contradictory knowledge and then creating a juxtaposition experience that is repeated a
few times.
© 2016 Coherence Psychology Institute, LLC. All rights reserved. This publication in part or whole may not be reproduced for distribution in any form without written permission from CPI.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
2
Correspondence between the steps of methodology in Coherence Therapy and those
of the Therapeutic Reconsolidation Process, a universal template for utilizing
memory reconsolidation in clinical practice. (For full account see Unlocking the
Emotional Brain, chapter 2.)
Therapeutic Reconsolidation Process
I. Accessing
sequence
A. Identify symptom
B. Retrieve target learning
Coherence Therapy
Identify symptom
Discover symptomrequiring schema
Integrate symptomrequiring schema
Transform symptomrequiring schema
C. Identify disconfirming
knowledge
II. Transformation 1. Reactivate target learning
sequence
2. Activate disconfirming
knowledge, mismatching
target learning
3. Repeat mismatched pairing
III. Verification
phase
V. Verify erasure of target
learning:
• Symptom cessation
• Non-reactivation of target
learning
• Effortless permanence
Identify disconfirming
knowledge
}
Activate both symptomrequiring schema and
disconfirming knowledge
in juxtaposition
Repeat juxtaposition
Verify nullification of
schema:
• Symptom cessation
• Non-reactivation of
target schema
• Effortless permanence
Finding contrary knowledge that will disconfirm the target schema [TRP step C]
The most important condition for successfully finding contrary knowledge in Coherence Therapy is a thorough
completion of the preceding steps of discovering and integrating the symptom-generating schema [TRP step B].
Here’s why:
• The process of finding contradictory knowledge is completely guided by and based on knowing specifically
what needs to be disconfirmed—the schema previously revealed in step B.
• If you are not yet closely familiar with the specific make-up of the target schema— core beliefs, meanings,
models and expectations defining a dire problem (a suffering that is urgent to avoid) and the necessary
solution (how to avoid it)—you cannot efficiently find contrary knowledge that will specifically disconfirm
those well-defined components. Disconfirmation must be very specific.
• Therefore, slower is faster: dwell with schema discovery and integration [TRP step B] and do a thorough
job there before trying to head for a juxtaposition experience [TRP steps C-1-2-3].
When the time is right to begin the search for contradictory knowledge, the following map of its possible sources
will equip you to conduct the search efficiently.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
3
Sources of contrary knowings
The needed contrary knowing will either be found in the client’s already-existing knowledge or it will be
created by a new experience that occurs during or between therapy sessions.
Both sources—already-existing knowledge and new experiences—can be accessed through a wide variety of
techniques. The techniques listed below are a basic set that will equip you for versatile, effective work with
nearly all clients.
Already existing knowledge is searched to find contrary knowledge in two main ways: mismatch detection
and past opposite experiences.
Mismatch detection. This, as a rule, is the first approach for finding contrary knowledge. It is carried out
simply by guiding the client to make declarative assertions of the discovered pro-symptom schema. Such
overt statements are a standard part of Coherence Therapy’s integration phase for completing TRP step B.
Overt statements of the target schema engage the brain’s own mismatch detection system. In a sizable
fraction of cases, the mismatch detector finds contradictory knowledge that the client already possesses but
has never experienced in juxtaposition with the pro-symptom schema, and automatically brings it forward
into awareness and directly into that juxtaposition. The client, in the midst of asserting the schema’s
knowings and expectations, suddenly experiences a distinctive “Hey, wait a minute!” sensation, followed by
the contrary knowledge coming into focus and articulation.
Through mismatch detection, TRP step B can spontaneously cascade into fulfilling steps C, 1 and 2. The
importance of thoroughly carrying out TRP step B by dwelling in the discovered schema and guiding overt
statements of it is again apparent here.
Mismatch detection often occurs and produces a juxtaposition experience during widely used systems of
trauma therapy (such as EMDR, Progressive Counting, TIR, Sensorimotor Psychotherapy, Somatic
Experiencing, and tapping techniques) as well as in experiential therapies such as AEDP, Emotion-Focused
Therapy, Focusing, Hakomi, Internal Family Systems, IPNB, Pesso Boyden Therapy, and others.
Past opposite experiences. When overt statements do not elicit juxtaposition in the spontaneous manner
described above, the target schema remains in force, even though it is now fully revealed and well
integrated into awareness. The next option for finding contrary knowledge is to ask the client whether she or
he has ever had any past experiences in which life did not behave according to the specific expectations or
beliefs of the target schema.
If the client remembers any such experiences, guide an imaginal, experiential revisiting of the strongest
one or two of them. Focus the client on mindfully recognizing the divergence from what the target
schema expects. That accomplishes steps C, 1 and 2—finding contradictory knowledge and creating a
juxtaposition experience.
New experiences can be created to generate the needed contradictory knowledge if it is not found in existing
knowledge. Such new experiences can be created in several ways: daily life, structured revisiting, the clienttherapist relationship, self-revelation by others, and experiential psychoeducation.
Daily life fairly often produces situations that differ sharply from the expectations in people’s schemas.
However, it is only after a schema is integrated into ongoing awareness that the client notices such an
experience as being curiously at odds with a core belief or expectation. The client then mentions the
unusual experience and the therapist utilizes it to create an explicit juxtaposition experience.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
4
Structured revisiting is a guided experience of re-encountering the original scene or situation in which the
target schema’s component meanings and models were formed, and now having a very different experience
of that scene and reconstruing it, that is, forming new meanings and models that juxtapose with, disconfirm
and nullify the original ones. This can be accomplished using many well-known techniques of psychotherapy, such as:
Empowered reenactment of a traumatic incident. The therapist closely accompanies and guides
client to revisit the incident, move through it and respond differently than in the original case, now
forcefully enacting the natural, self-protective behavior that was originally blocked. This creates a new
experience of preventing harm, which contradicts and disconfirms the helpless vulnerability that was
learned in the original incident and became the client’s ongoing, implicit expectation. This expectation
of being helplessly vulnerable is usually responsible for the ongoing, traumatic quality of the memory
and is often the root and driver of ongoing PTSD symptoms. The disappearance of helplessness in the
very scene that had produced it is a built-in juxtaposition experience that de-traumatizes the memory.
Inner child work. In a scene of mistreatment in childhood, the adult client or the therapist observes
and interacts with the client’s child self and guides the child into experiencing new meanings and
construals of what is happening that differ from and dispel the child’s original meanings, which have
been generating low-self-worth, depression, anxiety and/or body symptoms.
EMDR, NLP, progressive counting, TIR, tapping. These therapy systems consist mainly of structured revisiting and can be applied to specific target schemas in Coherence Therapy. These therapies
set up some special internal condition, such as dual focus, that allows the mind to freshly revisit and
reconstrue an original traumatic incident from a viewpoint outside the schema (the construal) that was
formed in that incident and that normally rules the client’s response to the incident’s component cues.
De-suppression of traumatic memory. Traumatic memory is held in a state of suppression that keeps
the original suffering out of awareness. Though such suppression entails costly symptoms (including
emotional dissociation, somatic tightness, psychogenic physical pain, and hypervigilant avoidance of
reminders), it exists as the client’s necessary solution to the problem of having living knowledge of
extreme suffering that is expected to be overwhelming and beyond the client’s capacity to experience
consciously. That implicit model of the client’s emotional incapacity encounters a contrary knowing
when the client, guided and accompanied empathetically by the therapist, revisits traumatic experience,
opens to it and feels it without being overwhelmed or shattered by it. That juxtaposition dissolves both
the client’s view of emotion as a great danger and also the need for the suppression solution, so the
various symptoms entailed by suppression disappear. Of course, de-suppression must be carried out in
small enough steps to be bearable and workable for the client at every step. The point here is that the
process of de-suppression of traumatic memory is itself a source of contrary knowledge that creates a
juxtaposition and dispels an array of significant PTSD symptoms.
The client-therapist relationship can create a new relational experience that contradicts and transforms the
client’s negative relational expectations, also known as insecure attachment and low self-esteem. This use
of the client-therapist relationship is capable of nullifying some schemas of insecure attachment, but not
others; and not all clients’ presenting problems are based in insecure attachment in the first place. (For a
detailed examination of these important matters, see chapter 5 of Unlocking the Emotional Brain.)
Self-revelation by others occurs typically in couple and family therapy when one person shares the inner
true meaning of his or her behavior, and this revealed meaning is for others a new experience that
juxtaposes with and dispels the problematic meanings they had been attributing to that behavior.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
5
Example: A father has been criticizing his teenage son as a lazy goof-off for spending so much time on
social media, and the boy has felt hurt and alienated by his father’s negative judgment of him. Then, in
a family therapy session, the boy vulnerably and tearfully reveals that he feels deeply lonely and isolated
in his peer life at school and that social media gives him some relief from that aloneness by connecting
him to “friends” all over the world. This new meaning of the behavior dispels the father’s prior
disparaging meaning of it.
Experiential psychoeducation occurs when the therapist imparts new information that immediately lights
up and is experienced by the client as a felt reality, not merely dry facts. After the therapist has become
familiar with the make-up of the client’s symptom-requiring schema, he or she may be able to provide
information that the client experiences as new, lucid knowing that juxtaposes with the schema, disconfirming and nullifying some key part of it.
Example: A woman client was stuck in the distress of feeling deeply hurt, rejected and unloved by her
husband because he had repeatedly disregarded all of her helpful, caring suggestions regarding his
serious health problem that had developed. “I don’t matter” were the words that captured her core
despair, an ego-state that was a primary wound from her childhood. After empathizing with her
experience, the therapist soon commented, “I remember that you once told me that your husband
suffered throughout his childhood from feeling massively dominated and controlled by his mother.”
Suddenly the client said with great energy, “Oh! That’s right! That’s why he isn’t listening to me—
he’s so afraid of being controlled by me like he was by her! It’s not that I don't matter and he doesn’t
respect my knowledge!” Her previous distress vanished with this change in the meaning she attributed
to her husband’s behavior, brought about by one bit of skillfully delivered information about her
husband that was real to her. The therapist, seeing the opportunity for generalizing this shift into a
more broad-ranging disconfirmation, then said, “What if it was the same with your parents? What if
their disregard of you really meant something about their emotional baggage, instead of meaning that
you don’t matter? And what if anyone’s disregard of you is the same?” This had strong impact and the
learned identity or ego-state of “I don’t matter” no longer flared up after this.
From contrary knowing to juxtaposition: The importance of making the juxtaposition explicit
For maximum consistency of producing transformational change with clients, do not assume that the client, in
having the contradictory knowledge, is also having the juxtaposition experience. The client may have disconnected from the experience of the pro-symptom schema in attending to the contrary knowledge. Always guide
the both-at-once juxtaposition experience explicitly. That is done by verbally cueing the client to mindfully feel
both the target schema’s version of reality and the contrary knowing or experience. Below are additional
guidelines.
Guiding the first juxtaposition experience [TRP steps 1 and 2]
It may take any number of sessions to retrieve the target schema and then find a contrary knowledge [TRP steps
B and C], but then the juxtaposition experience [TRP steps 1 and 2] is simple to guide and typically requires just
minutes.
In a juxtaposition experience, you are cueing the client to subjectively feel two different knowings concurrently,
and both feel real, yet both cannot possibly be true.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
6
This template is often useful: “Let’s go over two things that seem to feel true for you. It would be good if
you picture and feel these things as much as possible as we review them. First, what you learned in life very
deeply is that ____[core belief/mental model that is the target of change]____ . And second, you’ve had
experiences, such as _________, that have shown you that _____[contradictory knowing]_____.”
As you cue the two knowings [TRP steps 1 and 2], you empathize equally with each, indicating no favoring or
disfavoring of either. Any favoring or disfavoring cues the client to re-suppress and disown the target emotional
learning (schema), which switches the process into being counteractive and suppressive rather than transformational and nullifying. You are trusting the client’s mind and brain to register the disconfirmation and unlearn and
nullify the target schema. So you ask simply, “How is it to be in touch with both of those?”
Guiding a few repetitions of the juxtaposition experience [TRP step 3]
A juxtaposition experience is an oddly surprising, edgy experience for the client, so it is natural to dwell with it
and review it a few times during the remainder of the session, creating repetitions.
The first repetition comes from asking “How is it to be in touch with both of those?” after initially guiding the
juxtaposition. Two more repetitions can usually be created in a natural manner simply by empathetically
reviewing what the client has recognized and experienced on both sides of the juxtaposition. A total of three
such in-session repetitions is usually sufficient.
In reviewing, very specifically name the disconfirmed and disconfirming knowings, in order to re-cue them.
In that way, the client re-encounters the juxtaposition afresh. For example, the therapist says, “All along, it
just seemed so true that ______________ . And now it’s something of a surprise to recognize that _______
_____________ .” Then further discussion will afford additional opportunites to again refer specifically to
both knowings, for another repetition.
Write the juxtaposition on a (paper or email) card for the client to read daily between sessions. The phrasing
given just above is useful in most cases.
Verifying transformational change [TRP step V]
Asking “How is it to be in touch with both of those?” not only repeats the juxtaposition but also, by prompting
the client to re-sample both sides of the juxtaposition, it probes for whether the target learning is continuing or
ceasing to feel real. This begins the verification phase [TRP step V].
If the juxtaposition is successfully disconfirming and dissolving the target schema, the client will respond to the
above question by expressing either gleeful laughter, or a sense that the schema now seems silly or absurd, or,
conversely, by expressing some form of distress, such as a pained grimace or tears over recognizing that so
much of his or her life was shaped by beliefs now recognized to be false. All of those are initial markers of
schema nullification. Thorough verification requires confirmation over time of the full set of markers
mentioned earlier: the schema is devoid of its former compelling emotional realness and no longer triggers in
response to its former cues, and it no longer generates the symptoms it had been driving, with no ongoing effort
required.
If the target schema remains real-feeling and triggerable after a set of well-crafted (highly specific and richly
experiential) juxtaposition experiences, the therapist should begin to consider that resistance to transformation
may be occurring.
Guidelines for Creating Juxtaposition Experiences
7
Such resistance is not conscious. It occurs if disconfirmation of the target schema (recognition of it as untrue)
would bring some knowing or consequence that is too distressing to allow, requiring blockage of schema
nullification and maintaining the schema in force. Even though the target schema is itself a source of suffering,
its nullification can bring strong distress in various ways.
So, when a schema remains in force after a well guided set of juxtaposition experiences, the therapist regards
the resistance to transformation to be the current symptom and does Coherence Therapy on it: The therapist
gently begins looking for the specific distress that the schema’s nullification would bring. The client is guided
in small, tolerable steps to face that distress and to render it workable. As soon as it feels workable, the
therapist repeats the juxtaposition experience, and now the schema dissolves.
Where to find case examples illustrating sources of contrary knowing
UEB = Unlocking the Emotional Brain (view on amazon: http://amzn.to/2gFro38)
MRP = Memory Reconsolidation in Psychotherapy (view on amazon: http://amzn.to/2gFQ5gS)
DOBT = Depth Oriented Brief Therapy (view on amazon: http://amzn.to/2gUPY02)
Source of contrary knowledge
Published case examples
Existing knowledge
• Mismatch detection
UEB pp. 71–77; UEB pp. 77–86; UEB pp. 120–123; DOBT pp. 184–185;
online videos at http://bit.ly/2gDBpkP: “Compulsive Underachieving,” “Down Every Year,”
and “Stuck in Depression”
• Past opposite experiences
Psychotherapy Networker articles: http://bit.ly/2gg9U07 and http://bit.ly/1We4HDZ
New experiences
• Daily life
UEB pp. 43–61; Psychotherapy Networker article: http://bit.ly/1We4HDZ;
Therapy Today article: http://bit.ly/2gGWd7G
• Structured revisiting
UEB pp. 86–91; MRP pp. 69–78; New Therapist article: http://bit.ly/2g3pCZG
• Client-therapist relationship
UEB pp. 106–109; UEB pp. 130–136; MRP pp. 29–35
• Self-revelation by others
DOBT pp. 22–24; DOBT pp. 221–230; DOBT pp. 240–256
• Experiential psychoeducation
UEB ch. 7; Psychotherapy Networker article: http://bit.ly/2guAAbe